Anyone clued up on benefits? Think me mate is in cloud cuckoo land

Harry_Powell

Snooze wrote: »

Rather surprised at this from you considering the last words we had. :rolleyes: Clearly you still haven't gotten over the DD debacle despite your protestations to the contrary. You bring a whole new meaning to the phrase 'blowing hot and cold'. Anyway, whatever... that's your issue to deal with.

Everything written in my OP is exactly 'as is'. I really don't see what point (if there actually was one) you are trying to prove and nor can I see what difference the wording would have made. I was not looking for sympathy and nor can I figure out why you think I am either. I simply wanted to get rough figures from those in-the-know on here that I could stuck under his nose and go 'look, this isn't gonna be happening for ya'. As it turns out it seems that I was wrong and from the figures provided by lemonjelly and others, he is going to be living a pretty comfortable lifestyle financially from the state. I don't have a problem with this per-se, as I just want to make sure he gets as much support as he can and doesn't suddenly find out that he actually isn't entitled to a lot of stuff that he thinks he is and ends up struggling.

I certainly don't envy his position and the tough decisions he has to make.

R

I'm not sure what you're annoyed with, Rob. If it's the first bit of my post, then that was not about you, apologies - sue misunderstood too so I must not have worded it very well, a consequence of dashing off posts while my boss is hovering about.

If it is the second bit, then I kinda stand by what I said, but (ironically) perhaps I could have worded it better? However, you know exactly what many of the people of this board are like when anyone mentions the 'benefits' word. The usual suspects get all throthy at the mouth and usually a lot of decent and informative posts are then lost in the hubbub. With this sort of reaction in mind, in this particular board, I naturally assumed that you were 'playing to the crowd' and teasing the more extreme board members. Apologies again if I was incorrect. My post was supposed to be a 'gentle ribbing' but it may have gotten somewhat lost in translation.

Bogof_Babe

Snooze wrote: »

He just completely disagrees (like me) that you should have to sell all your assets that you've grafted hard for all your life to pay for your care. This is exactly what your taxes should cover you for

The benefits system has really distorted (some) people's view of taking responsibility for oneself. Surely the default position should be that everyone (who possibly can) makes provision for their own needs, and doesn't expect our overstretched "state" to provide for their various needs at various life stages.

If the system was still being run as it was 40 years ago, and the cult of fraudulent claims had not become the scourge that it is, no-one would resent those who do get support (because they are genuinely in need), and no-one would put their hands out for largesse when they are perfectly capable of paying their own way.

I blame the single mothers who have never had a proper relationship with their child/ren's father/s as much as I blame those who are quite simply faking illness, because money has been thrown at both of these groups in an effort to be seen to be looking after the "vulnerable" (haha) in society.

It is no wonder those who work and pay their way feel they should get something "back", but being bitter about it will not solve the problem. You don't get it "back" because it was never allocated on an individual basis, and if everyone took out what they put in there would be nothing left to look after those who are genuinely unable to fend for themselves.

As for the first part of the extract I quote above, why should this frail and presumably fairly old lady even want to hang on to her house, given that she is unable to live in it herself? No need to answer that, it's the old "inheritance grab" again isn't it, dressed up as care and concern.

Anyway shouldn't this thread be on Discussion Time? :rotfl:

treliac

Snooze wrote: »

I have also warned him that while his OH says she is fine with it that he should be double-checking and triple-checking because it's easy to say what someone wants to hear at the time, but when the reality of it kicks in their answer could well be totally different which will ultimately lead to huge problems in their relationship.
R

Even if he takes on this responsibility with the best of intentions possible, and leaving the money aspect entirely aside, his mum's needs are going to be incredibly heavy with little let up in demands.

She may need 24 hour care now, with whatever that entails but how active is the care that's needed?

Does she need feeding and to be given special drinks in case she chokes? Is she incontinent - with all the unpleasant hard work that entails. How mobile is she. Does she need wheelchair, hoisting etc?

It's one thing, caring as a job and working shifts from which you can go home at the end of the working day. Quite another when you are confronted with the responsibility all your waking and many of your sleeping hours.

All this on top of looking after a baby who will demand much undivided time and attention.

And....... mum's condition will worsen with time. She may have further strokes, leading to higher needs and even more attention to accomplish increasingly time consuming care routines. She will probably get colds, flu and other infections on top of her other disabilities. She will experience many difficult emotions as your dependent.

Yes, this is enough to challenge the most capable, committed and caring families and can, indeed, lead to breakdown in relationships.

One other consideration, maybe...... if/when her nursing care needs are high enough, she might qualify for Continuing Care funding, which could entitle her to receive in-patient nursing care free of charge.

System

Active_X wrote: »

your friend will be rolling in it until his mum dies, then he will have to have between 7 to 10 kids to get a decent income from tax credits. he should keep breeding so that the last one turns 18 just as he turns 65 and picks up his state pension.

it's a great lifestyle and we did it years ago. i havent worked for 5 years and still can afford a trip to spain each year. he should find a bent doctor so that when his kid is born they can find something wrong with it and get disability for that too. it's a gravy train that never stops. cradel to grave. i love this country, so much better than where i lived in somalia.

And this is what's wrong with this country and the benefits system

Bogof_Babe

Harry_Powell wrote: »

However, you know exactly what many of the people of this board are like when anyone mentions the 'benefits' word. The usual suspects get all throthy at the mouth

Happy to oblige (Not strictly "of this board" though, so maybe I don't count).

Harry_Powell

Bogof_Babe wrote: »

Happy to oblige (Not strictly "of this board" though, so maybe I don't count).

Nah, you didn't mention putting Chav's into Death Camps, a pre-requisite for all 'throthers'.

Bogof_Babe

Harry_Powell wrote: »

Nah, you didn't mention putting Chav's into Death Camps, a pre-requisite for all 'throthers'.

:eek: And I thought things got heated on DT!

tigtag02

lemonjelly wrote: »

Yes, but it is for 3 adults & 1 child, on a lower income. & the one adult is quite ill/has a lot of care needs from the above. Which is likely to increase the costs of running the household.

Add on the wages (roughly £1200p/m) & you have a £2k p/m income to look after all the above.

Snooze - deprivation of capital is where a person gets rid of savings in order to be able to access benefits, ie by giving it away, or spending it on unneccessary items.

£1200 pcm for a minimum wage job

Thats almost 48 hours a week BEFORE tax!!

Also - in reply to an earlier post - a blue badge doesnt mean free parking!

Bogof_Babe

Following on from treliac's post, there is also the possibility that mother might not be able to be left on her own at all. So no family outings, no visiting friends, not even being able to go shopping together.

It might be a novelty at first, being totally different to his job, but it can soon turn relentless and exhausting.

Graham_Devon

Bogof_Babe wrote: »

:eek: And I thought things got heated on DT!

You aint seen nothing!